Does God have free will?

Radagast said:

Here is Aquinas on the issue:

Click to expand...

I don't consider Aquinas a very good source about such questions. He considers Aristotle (among others) as an authority.

Anyway, the question of free will makes no sense for God.

There are aspects of our soul which clearly don't have free will, for example, the subconscious or unconscious. Only when conscious do we have free will, and only then regarding things involving the will.

Materialist scientists want to deny free will because, I think, they might have to consider the existence of something outside of the physical material universe.

Everybodyknows said:

To all who raised timelessness as a solution to the original question. I don't feel this really addresses the issue of free will. We still essentially face the exact same problem. If we view timeless states as @TaylorSexton put it;

Sounds reasonable at face value, although I'm sure @YouAreAwesome will dispute. Decision logically precedes action even outside of time. Ok I'll accept that. However if we extend this thinking a little further we can conclude that God's nature would precede his decision, which in turn would precede action, in the logical order of things. The attributes of his nature are omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, goodness, love, etc. The key point here being that his knowledge (omniscience) precedes decision. If knowledge of his choice logically precedes his choice then choice is negated. The logical order then would be
knowledge > will > action
where will is not free will but merely the intent to act according to his knowledge. The only way to preserve free will is to sacrifice omniscience.

We are essentially still facing the exact same problem as foreknowledge in time just in different words.

Click to expand...

It is IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile that omniscience can exist with or without time.

thesunisout said:

Thank you for the reply, but I don't want to get into a dispute over words. You believe in open theism, apparently, and so you are defending that position. I don't want to argue against that because these conversations never get resolved. They just go round and round and round.

Click to expand...

Look, I'm just going to put it bluntly, I'll take your reply to mean "I can't back up my opinions". It's far to common among the christians I know unfortunately to present their opinions as facts but then bow out when they are challenged - or to resort to "His ways are Higher than our Ways" etc.

YouAreAwesome said:

Look, I'm just going to put it bluntly, I'll take your reply to mean "I can't back up my opinions". It's far to common among the christians I know unfortunately to present their opinions as facts but then bow out when they are challenged - or to resort to "His ways are Higher than our Ways" etc.

Click to expand...

You can take it that way if you want. However, my stated reason is the reason I am withdrawing from the discussion with you. I'll expand on that a little..

The reason behind that is that we cannot agree that Gods word is authoritative for this discussion. Open theists posit a limited God who doesn't know the future. Well, that makes swiss cheese of His word being authoritative. So when I say something, it's my interpretation. When you say something, it's all facts. When I pointed out that your philosophical position was also based on your interpretation, you told me the majority of philosophers agree with you. Well, whether they do or not, it doesn't change the fact that you are interpreting things. If you're talking about probability based on how many people agree with you, that isn't persuasive at all. When I find this level of disagreement with people, having conversations about these subjects becomes like trying to nail jello to a wall.

In any case, I think you're a bright person who I believe is seeking God, so don't take it personally. God bless

Everybodyknows said:

A dispute of the universality of the laws of logic is a good topic for another thread. I'll join the conversation if you start it. However you are pushing a view that is contrary to pretty much every serious Christian philosopher, so you have a pretty big case to argue. I once thought like you until people much smarter than myself showed me the flaws in my reasoning.

Click to expand...

I may do that brother, it would be an interesting conversation. I'm off on a trip for a little..going back east with my wife to visit her family, so it'll be a couple of weeks! See you around

thesunisout said:

The reason behind that is that we cannot agree that Gods word is authoritative for this discussion.

Click to expand...

Huh? Why can't we agree on this? I see God's word as authoritative. Genuinely confused by this statement.

thesunisout said:

Open theists posit a limited God who doesn't know the future.

Click to expand...

No, I believe the Bible presents our God as knowing the settled future, but is willing to change His mind such as with Abraham and that there are many forms of prophecy - conditional prophecy, prophecy that speaks a thing into happening, prophecy that tells the future, prophecy that builds up another person etc. I believe the Bible teaches He knows all there is to know about the future; the only difference is, He can't know what doesn't exist e.g. our future choices.

thesunisout said:

Well, that makes swiss cheese of His word being authoritative.

Click to expand...

I could say the same thing about your Calvinistic leanings. Just because we read the Bible though different lenses doesn't mean I can claim that you don't hold the Bible as authoritative.

thesunisout said:

So when I say something, it's my interpretation. When you say something, it's all facts.

Click to expand...

We are both interpreting to the best of our knowledge and revelation. The point I make is that one can't claim certain "facts" about the Bible that are unresolved such as God knowing the total future, Him being "in control of every little thing that happens" (often sovereignty is interpreted this way), and Him being timeless. I challenge these and you say "we can't discuss because these are obviously in the Bible". Well if they are so obvious it should be easy to prove. But the more time one spends thinking on these things, praying, reading, the more one realises they are not set in stone at all.

thesunisout said:

When I pointed out that your philosophical position was also based on your interpretation, you told me the majority of philosophers agree with you. Well, whether they do or not, it doesn't change the fact that you are interpreting things. If you're talking about probability based on how many people agree with you, that isn't persuasive at all.

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree we shouldn't use population numbers to prove a position, that is ridiculous, however it should capture our attention when the leading christian philosophers are moving in a particular direction - not to just mindlessly agree with them, but at the very least to open ourselves to their reasons - they are paid to think through these things after all (almost no one else is).

thesunisout said:

When I find this level of disagreement with people, having conversations about these subjects becomes like trying to nail jello to a wall.

Click to expand...

We have rather opposing systematic theologies. My challenges to Calvinism are broad (multiple problems) and it's probably why it feels difficult to nail down because a systematic theology is the lens through which we read the bible and even view God; to let go of one cherished idea, is to bring so many other challenges that it often seems easier to just say "His way are Higher". I understand, I was raised Adventist.

thesunisout said:

In any case, I think you're a bright person who I believe is seeking God, so don't take it personally. God bless

Click to expand...

Cheers, same for you, have a good break.

YouAreAwesome said:

No, I believe the Bible presents our God as knowing the settled future, but is willing to change His mind such as with Abraham and that there are many forms of prophecy - conditional prophecy, prophecy that speaks a thing into happening, prophecy that tells the future, prophecy that builds up another person etc. I believe the Bible teaches He knows all there is to know about the future; the only difference is, He can't know what doesn't exist e.g. our future choices.

Click to expand...

God has heard every thought you have had and
will have, then He formulated His response and
the final outcome for you.

Then He created the Cosmos and now holds each
electron in it's proper orbit to reach His desires.


Colossians 1
16 For in Him all things were created,
things in heaven and on earth,
visible and invisible,
whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities.
All things were created through Him and for Him.

17 He is before all things,
and in Him all things hold together.

YouAreAwesome said:

Him being "in control of every little thing that happens"

Click to expand...

17 He is before all things,
and in Him all things hold together.

YouAreAwesome said:

The point I make is that one can't claim certain "facts" about the Bible that are unresolved such as God ...being timeless.

Click to expand...

Revelation 22:13
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Revelation 1:8
"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."

Revelation 21:6-7
Then He said to me, "It is done I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. "He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son.

Revelation 1:17-18
When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man And He placed His right hand on me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.

Isaiah 44:6
"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me.

Isaiah 48:12
"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last.

SkyWriting said:

Revelation 22:13
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Revelation 1:8
"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."

Revelation 21:6-7
Then He said to me, "It is done I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. "He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son.

Revelation 1:17-18
When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man And He placed His right hand on me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.

Isaiah 44:6
"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me.

Isaiah 48:12
"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last.

Click to expand...

Your argument:


Please explain how you get from "beginning and the end" to "timeless" as both words refer to time.

YouAreAwesome said:

Your argument:

God is the beginning and the end.
Therefore God is timeless.​

Please explain how you get from "beginning and the end" to "timeless" as both words refer to time.

Click to expand...

God is there, in both places, for our beginning and our end, and doesn't change in the middle.
Time causes degradation and decay and that is Satan's area of expertise.
Whereas people change and die over time, God does not.

Everybodyknows said:

There is nothing in these verses that specifically leads one to the conclusion of God being timeless as opposed to eternal in time.

This however;

Revelation 1:8
"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."
​

specifically implies God being in time as it uses tenses of past present and future to describe his existence.

Click to expand...

Being human, using words we understand is a good thing.
We don't have any words for things that don't change and die becasue of time.
Though eternal comes close.

Job 36:26
"Behold, God is exalted, and we do not know Him; The number of His years is unsearchable.

73 More Bible verses about God, The Eternal

Everybodyknows said:

This:
≠ This:

Click to expand...

Which part would you like me to elaborate on? I can't support each word
with scripture in each post.

YouAreAwesome said:

Huh? Why can't we agree on this? I see God's word as authoritative. Genuinely confused by this statement.

Click to expand...

The scripture writers must have gotten their writings
from some source that we do, or do not have access to?

Everybodyknows said:

This:
≠ This:

Click to expand...

Thank you for correcting me. If you think God has
-No Control
-Limited Control or
-Full Control
you may offer your support for your decision.

I stand behind "Full control of the instantaneous position of every electron in the Cosmos."

17 He is before all things,
and in Him all things hold together.


Psalm 135:6
Whatever the LORD pleases, He does, In heaven and in earth, in the seas and in all deeps.

Psalm 115:3
But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.

Isaiah 46:10
Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';

Daniel 4:35
"All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, But He does according to His will in the host of heaven And among the inhabitants of earth; And no one can ward off His hand Or say to Him, 'What have You done?'

Luke 1:37
Job 42:2
Matthew 19:26
Ephesians 3:20
1 Samuel 2:10
2 Chronicles 20:6
Job 9:12

Everybodyknows said:

If God knows all, including his own future, is it possible for him to have free will?

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

How can anyone bequeath to someone else, something they do not possess?